There is a large backlog of discussions at RfD awaiting closing, some outstanding for over a month. I cannot close any of the discussions from 6 June or earlier (and probably some later than that too), so if you have the time it would be very helpful if you could help reduce the backlog. Thank you, Thryduulf ( talk) 11:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Rossami, for creating these RfD and notifying me. I added my two cent(octgesimal)s worth. Thank you also for your time invested in clean-up and maintenance of wikipedia. Bcharles ( talk) 17:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_15#Template:Cop about the second nomination of Template:Cop in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 06:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_8#Template:wprk about the nomination of Template:wprk in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 09:16, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_25#Template:Wpcm about the nomination of Template:Wpcm in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 07:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
There are several redirects for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_March_27 in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 16:05, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
There are several redirects for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_14 in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 03:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
The article Boxx has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
QVVERTYVS (
hm?) 11:30, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Boxx is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boxx (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 09:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot ( talk) 00:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
You may be interested in the discussion at Template talk:Short pages monitor#Need to define and possibly rethink this template. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 23:46, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Would you mind recounting here. [1] Does this close relate to this comment [2] Legacypac ( talk) 05:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Masterbated and Masterbatory. Since you had some involvement with these redirects, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy( TALK CONT) 20:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions. Since you have had some involvement with the Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions redirects (i.e. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 5#Re-introductory), you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy( TALK CONT) 03:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Rossami,
In the last few days I have been hitting your arguments for keeping things pretty hard over at WP:RfD. Please believe me that this is in no way anything personal and I see the good work you do and all the contributions you make, it just happens to be a run of bad luck for both of us that we are on opposing sides on every argument.
I have tried to make it not look like any kind of personal attack, which it certainly isn't, attacking your argument not you personally. However, if it has ever seemed like that, I can only and sincerely apologise.
I would hope if we ever met in person we would both also argue vigorously while sharing a bottle of wine or whatever is your fancy.
I can assure you once again it is not a personal attack over at RfD and nobody - not a single person or an admin or anything - has warned me, but I can see how it might look like it. I have made a similar but less personal apology over at RfD but felt I should do so here. Thanks for leaving the message on my user talk page, that kinda broke the ice. Si Trew ( talk) 06:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rossami, I think you should reconsider what happened at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 April 17#...Re. While I certainly think you're right that there wasn't consensus either way there, there was almost unanimous consensus at the RM that ...Re was ambiguous, so it really should've been retargeted at that point. Taking these discussions together, it seems clear that, while this may well be discussed more in the future, the term needs to be treated as ambiguous. (FWIW, I probably would've supported the RM.) -- BDD ( talk) 14:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 美. Since you had some involvement with the 美 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 08:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Egyptian mummy" ca.1898. Since you had some involvement with the "Egyptian mummy" ca.1898 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — PinkAmpers & (Je vous invite à me parler) 02:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM. Since you had some involvement with the IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 344917661X ( talk) 23:02, 23 June 2018 (UTC) Notice of redirect discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
Template:Afd footer (multiple) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 12:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
|
|
The redirect IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM until a consensus is reached. Helloheart 00:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).
|
|
[p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).
|
|
[s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to
note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).
Attachment disorder has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 02:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
There is a large backlog of discussions at RfD awaiting closing, some outstanding for over a month. I cannot close any of the discussions from 6 June or earlier (and probably some later than that too), so if you have the time it would be very helpful if you could help reduce the backlog. Thank you, Thryduulf ( talk) 11:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Rossami, for creating these RfD and notifying me. I added my two cent(octgesimal)s worth. Thank you also for your time invested in clean-up and maintenance of wikipedia. Bcharles ( talk) 17:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_15#Template:Cop about the second nomination of Template:Cop in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 06:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_8#Template:wprk about the nomination of Template:wprk in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 09:16, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_25#Template:Wpcm about the nomination of Template:Wpcm in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 07:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
There are several redirects for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_March_27 in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 16:05, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
There are several redirects for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_14 in which you may be interested. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 03:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
The article Boxx has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
QVVERTYVS (
hm?) 11:30, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Boxx is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boxx (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 09:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot ( talk) 00:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
You may be interested in the discussion at Template talk:Short pages monitor#Need to define and possibly rethink this template. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 23:46, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Would you mind recounting here. [1] Does this close relate to this comment [2] Legacypac ( talk) 05:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Masterbated and Masterbatory. Since you had some involvement with these redirects, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy( TALK CONT) 20:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions. Since you have had some involvement with the Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions redirects (i.e. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 5#Re-introductory), you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy( TALK CONT) 03:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Rossami,
In the last few days I have been hitting your arguments for keeping things pretty hard over at WP:RfD. Please believe me that this is in no way anything personal and I see the good work you do and all the contributions you make, it just happens to be a run of bad luck for both of us that we are on opposing sides on every argument.
I have tried to make it not look like any kind of personal attack, which it certainly isn't, attacking your argument not you personally. However, if it has ever seemed like that, I can only and sincerely apologise.
I would hope if we ever met in person we would both also argue vigorously while sharing a bottle of wine or whatever is your fancy.
I can assure you once again it is not a personal attack over at RfD and nobody - not a single person or an admin or anything - has warned me, but I can see how it might look like it. I have made a similar but less personal apology over at RfD but felt I should do so here. Thanks for leaving the message on my user talk page, that kinda broke the ice. Si Trew ( talk) 06:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rossami, I think you should reconsider what happened at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 April 17#...Re. While I certainly think you're right that there wasn't consensus either way there, there was almost unanimous consensus at the RM that ...Re was ambiguous, so it really should've been retargeted at that point. Taking these discussions together, it seems clear that, while this may well be discussed more in the future, the term needs to be treated as ambiguous. (FWIW, I probably would've supported the RM.) -- BDD ( talk) 14:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 美. Since you had some involvement with the 美 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 08:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Egyptian mummy" ca.1898. Since you had some involvement with the "Egyptian mummy" ca.1898 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — PinkAmpers & (Je vous invite à me parler) 02:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM. Since you had some involvement with the IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 344917661X ( talk) 23:02, 23 June 2018 (UTC) Notice of redirect discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
Template:Afd footer (multiple) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 12:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
|
|
The redirect IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM until a consensus is reached. Helloheart 00:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).
|
|
[p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).
Interface administrator changes
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).
|
|
[s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to
note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).
Interface administrator changes
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).
Attachment disorder has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 02:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).